Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input
 to HHH(DD)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 00:29:58 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <674a661e498281cca55b322cbd5905a1988a6171.camel@gmail.com>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me> <vvgr22$1ag3a$2@dont-email.me>
	 <vvgt36$1auqp$2@dont-email.me> <vvgtbe$1b0li$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvguot$1auqp$3@dont-email.me> <vvh0t2$1b939$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvhap5$1hp80$1@dont-email.me> <vvhf20$1ihs9$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvhfnd$1hvei$3@dont-email.me> <vvil99$1ugd5$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvinvp$1vglb$1@dont-email.me> <vviv75$222r6$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvj1fp$22a62$1@dont-email.me> <vvj2j6$23gk7$1@dont-email.me>
	 <as9TP.251456$lZjd.93653@fx05.ams4>
	 <87msbmeo3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjcge$27753$2@dont-email.me>
	 <vvjeqf$28555$1@dont-email.me> <vvjffg$28g5i$1@dont-email.me>
	 <875xiaejzg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjgt1$28g5i$5@dont-email.me>
	 <87jz6qczja.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjotc$28g5i$12@dont-email.me>
	 <vvnh9u$3hd96$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
	 <vvno4e$3in62$2@dont-email.me>
	 <5b14da4260c0b7e3235ce05f752c092fade4d70e.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvnsae$3in62$9@dont-email.me>
	 <11cc09876004107c47467b9481f614f45f450f2c.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvnu9k$3k258$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 18:29:59 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c665478d8699930ce63ac26f3a79e21a";
	logging-data="3801142"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18e7IrNYkW3+G0FkoyQGbd4"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7WhoK6bAuVd06kZNaNxpqH5gP3s=
In-Reply-To: <vvnu9k$3k258$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4758

On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 11:19 -0500, olcott wrote:
> On 5/10/2025 11:06 AM, wij wrote:
> > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 10:45 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > On 5/10/2025 10:28 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 09:33 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > On 5/10/2025 7:37 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> > > > > > Am 09.05.2025 um 04:22 schrieb olcott:
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Look at their replies to this post.
> > > > > > > Not a one of them will agree that
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > void DDD()
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 HHH(DDD);
> > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return; // final halt state
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > When 1 or more instructions of DDD are correctly
> > > > > > > simulated by HHH then the correctly simulated DDD cannot
> > > > > > > possibly reach its "return" instruction (final halt state).
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > They have consistently disagreed with this
> > > > > > > simple point for three years.
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > I guess that not even a professor of theoretical computer
> > > > > > science would spend years working on so few lines of code.
> > > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > I created a whole x86utm operating system.
> > > > > It correctly determines that the halting problem's
> > > > > otherwise "impossible" input is actually non halting.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > int DD()
> > > > > {
> > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 int Halt_Status =3D HHH(DD);
> > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (Halt_Status)
> > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 HERE: goto HERE;
> > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return Halt_Status;
> > > > > }
> > > > >=20
> > > > > https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
> > > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > Nope.
> > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0From I know HHH(DD) decides whether the input DD is "im=
possible" input or not.
> > > >=20
> > >=20
> > > DD has the standard form of the "impossible" input.
> > > HHH merely rejects it as non-halting.
> > >=20
> >=20
> > You said 'merely' rejects it as non-halting.
> > So, POOH do not answer the input of any other function?
> >=20
>=20
> The input that has baffled computer scientists for 90
> years is merely correctly determined to be non-halting
> when the behavior of this input is measured by HHH
> emulating this input according to the rules of the x86
> language.
>=20
> The same thing applies to the Linz proof yet cannot
> be understood until after HHH(DDD) and HHH(DD) are
> fully understood.
>=20

HHH(DDD) (whatever) at most says DDD is a pathological/midtaken input.
Others of what you say are your imagine and wishes, so far so true.